d at domenic.me (2015-06-08T00:04:52.177Z)
If I thought I could make any money then I would most definitely bet that the changes made to classes that are at the root of this problem will be the undoing of es classes and I find myself feeling more and more like avoiding them is the easiest thing to do. This use-case is a perfect example of something that is EXTREMELY unexpected which is funny because the changes are supposed to be supporting subclassing of built-ins. Very disheartened :(
If I thought I could make any money then I would most definitely bet that the changes made to classes that are at the root of this problem will be the undoing of es classes and I find myself feeling more and more like avoiding them is the easiest thing to do. This use-case is a perfect example of something that is EXTREMELY unexpected which is funny because the changes are supposed to be supporting subclassing of built-ins. Very disheartened :( - Matthew Robb On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Domenic Denicola <d at domenic.me> wrote: > Hmm I am pretty sure Babel et al. are correct here in not allowing this. > The super call needs to *finish* before you can use `this`. Chrome also > works this way. > > The correct workaround is > > ```js > let resolve, reject; > super((a, b) => { > resolve = a; > reject = b; > }); > > // use this > ``` > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20150602/7ef051cd/attachment.html>